01Facts
The Family Court, Godda, by judgment dated 30 August 2023 and decree dated 18 September 2023 in Original Suit No. 70 of 2020, directed Chandani Devi to hand over custody and guardianship of her younger daughter, Nilu Priya, to Ram Kumar Mehra
p. 1 · ¶ 4At the time of the appeal, the elder daughter, Anu Priya, lived with her father, while Nilu Priya was studying and residing during school terms at a boarding school in Deoghar
p. 2 · ¶ 5–6The mother accepted the existing arrangements but sought visitation rights and liberty to apply for the daughters to spend time with her during holidays, vacations, or special occasions
p. 2 · ¶ 7–8The parties reached a broad agreement, and the High Court heard the daughters’ wishes, including Nilu Priya’s preference to remain at her current school and stay with her father during holidays
pp. 1–3 · ¶ 2–3, 11–1202Issues
i.Whether the existing custody and guardianship arrangement should be disturbed in light of the parties’ agreement and the daughters’ circumstances and wishes
pp. 3–5 · ¶ 11–14, 19ii.Whether the mother should be granted visitation rights and liberty to seek variation so the daughters may spend time with her during holidays, vacations, or special occasions
pp. 2–5 · ¶ 7–9, 15, 17iii.Whether any future change to Nilu Priya’s school should be conditional on her consent
p. 3 · ¶ 1403Law Applied
The Court applied the principle that the welfare and paramount interest of the minor child govern custody arrangements, and that a child’s wishes are relevant but not the sole consideration in deciding a custody-related application
pp. 3–4 · ¶ 13, 17It also stated that custody orders are not permanent and may be varied by a competent court if circumstances warrant
p. 5 · ¶ 20In considering a school change for a 14-year-old child, the Court held that her autonomy and consent should be respected
p. 3 · ¶ 14No statute or precedent was cited in the judgment.
04Reasoning
Nilu Priya was settled at her current boarding school and clearly expressed her wish to remain there; the Court considered that disrupting the arrangement would not further her interests
p. 3 · ¶ 11–13Given her age and the Court’s assessment of her ability to make decisions concerning herself, any future school change was made conditional on her consent
p. 3 · ¶ 14The parties agreed to the mother’s visitation, and the father undertook not to obstruct reasonable visits after due intimation
p. 4 · ¶ 15The Court preserved the mother’s ability to seek holiday or vacation contact through the Family Court, which would decide any application under law, considering the children’s wishes alongside other relevant factors
p. 4 · ¶ 17It found no reason to disturb the custody and guardianship decree, while recognizing that custody arrangements remain capable of variation
pp. 4–5 · ¶ 19–2005Holding
The appeal was disposed of without costs.
pp. 4–5 · ¶ 15, 17, 19, 21The Family Court’s judgment and decree were affirmed, subject to modifications granting the mother reasonable visitation rights and liberty to apply to the Family Court for the daughters to stay with or spend time with her during holidays, vacations, or special occasions
pp. 4–5 · ¶ 15, 17, 19, 21Any such application must be decided in accordance with law, with the children’s wishes considered but not treated as the sole factor; a future change of Nilu Priya’s school requires her consent
pp. 3–4 · ¶ 14, 17Original Court PDF
CHANDANI DEVIvsRAM KUMAR MEHRA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
